CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Stuff

Caledonian Sleeper

(83 posts)
  • Started 10 years ago by Morningsider
  • Latest reply from chdot

123

  1. Morningsider
    Member

    SERCO has been awarded the 15 year long contract to run the Caledonian Sleeper.

    The same SERCO that is being investigated by the Serious Fraud Office for swindling the UK Government out of tens of millions of pounds through a prisoner tagging contract, that is being looked at by the UK Parliament over claims of systemic sexual assaults by some staff at the Yarls Wood immigration detention centre it manages and is slowly running the Northlink Ferries contract into the ground.

    Still, apparently they run very nice luxury trains in Australia, so that's okay.

    Just remember, among all the talk of new trains for the sleeper - that it is the taxpayer that is paying for these, not SERCO.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  2. steveo
    Member

    There really is no downside to defrauding the tax payer. You'll still keep your cushy job (MP's et al) and you'll still get your lucrative contracts (TOC's, G4S et al)

    Posted 10 years ago #

  3. kaputnik
    Moderator

    Morningsider, I'm sure you can clarify. Is it Transport Scotland that awarded this, or are other parts of the Government (Westminster or Holyrood) really pulling the strings?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  4. cc
    Member

    Fortunately there is a great alternative to Northlink, at least to get to Orkney - in my experience Pentland Ferries is comfortable, reliable, a lot cheaper and also provides a far shorter and smoother crossing.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  5. cb
    Member

    Also the John O'Groats ferry.

    http://www.jogferry.co.uk/Ferry.aspx

    Posted 10 years ago #

  6. Morningsider
    Member

    kaputnik - the Caledonian Sleeper franchise is awarded and funded by Scottish Ministers/Transport Scotland. The UK Government has no role in its award.

    The UK Government did provide £50m capital funding towards new rolling stock for the sleeper, which has to be match funded by the Scottish Government - so the new trains are being part funded by both Governments (although they will be owned by a private sector Rolling Stock Leasing Comapany - the financing of these things is unfeasibly complex).

    Posted 10 years ago #

  7. chdot
    Admin

    "jogferry"

    Does it have (large) 'hamster wheels' for propulsion?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  8. kaputnik
    Moderator

    @Morningsider thanks. Just wanted to be clear on which bunch of eejits thought this other bunch of eejits were a safe and reputable pair of hands to award this contract to.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  9. chdot
    Admin

    "The UK Government did provide £50m capital funding towards new rolling stock for the sleeper, which has to be match funded by the Scottish Government"

    BUT if more mileage is done in England surely UKGov should pay more??

    Only faaairr...

    Posted 10 years ago #

  10. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    There are times when I wonder if I'm actually awake. This has to be one of them.

    Around 70% of the public want the rail system nationalised;

    http://www.globalrailnews.com/2012/09/13/70-want-end-to-rail-privatisation/

    but it is handed to the most odious organisations, even when, like the East Coast Main Line, it worked better under state control.

    Morningsider will know better than me, but I believe EU competition law makes it very hard to nationalise something once it has been exposed to 'competition'.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  11. chdot
    Admin

    "the financing of these things is unfeasibly complex"

    Not really -

    Gov(s) pays for stuff. Private company charges another Gov subsidised private company a LOT of money to run an 'iconic service'.

    Profits at each stage of this chain may or may not be taxed efficiently in the UK.

    Only private companies know how to run trains which is why East Coast will be privatised (again) soon.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  12. kaputnik
    Moderator

    Why is it not allowed for train companies to own trains, but airlines can own planes and bus companies can own buses. And I can own a bike?

    Perhaps the ideal EU model would be for me to set myself up as a BOC, enter into a "competitive" tender with myself to see if I offer the best value for money and then lease my bike from a BOSCO, then paying large fees to a quasi state owned cycle path network operator.

    Oh. That's UKIP cycling policy is it not?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  13. Arellcat
    Moderator

    In Soviet Russia, bicycle owns you.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  14. crowriver
    Member

    I prefer Flann O'Brien's world where we become part bicycle, and the bicycle becomes part us, due to intermingling of atoms while riding.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  15. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    In Maoist China ALL TO MELT BICYCLES TO MAKE STEEL.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  16. Morningsider
    Member

    IWRATS - EU law requires rail infrastructure and state owned train services to be separate (e.g. RFF and SNCF in France). This is to allow equal access to the rail network for the incumbent, state owned companies and other rail service providers. There is nothing in EU law that would prevent the UK Government from taking the rail franchises back into state control as the current franchises end.

    There is already provision for open access operators on the UK rail network, i.e. trains operated by private companies outside the franchise system - e.g. Grand Central, so that takes care of most competition worries.

    UK-law currently prevents any state owned entity from running rail services, except the UK and Scottish Governments, which can provide services as "operator of last resort", as happened with East Coast. It's open to debate whether the Scottish Government could have used these reserve powers to bring the ScotRail/Sleeper franchises back under state control next year.

    There is nothing stopping a TOC from owning its own trains, but it would be a very expensive thing to do and quite risky, as the trains generally last far longer than a franchise.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  17. Instography
    Member

    Which aspects of it are open to debate? Is it framed as a fall-back position so that they would maybe need a franchise to first fail?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  18. steveo
    Member

    The Scot Gov could just tender the franchise with the conditions under which they would run the franchise. If no TOC would be willing to run it at that level of return to the public purse or such a low level of subsidisation then they could easily use the last resort argument if one is then great.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  19. Morningsider
    Member

    Insto - stevo got in there first.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  20. kaputnik
    Moderator

    Loco news.

    Preferred bidder are proposing to use Class 92 electric locos between Edinburgh/Glasgow and London. Those are surplus freight locomotives designed for the channel tunnel and with an 87mph top speed. Currently, Class 90 is used, which is an express passenger-freight design capable of 110mph running.

    More bafflingly (and troublingly), for the non-electrified service to the north, they are proposing to use refurbished Class 73s. These are 50 year old locomotives which were designed for the south-east of England for 3rd rail electric running but also with a wee 600hp diesel engine for running between gaps in the 3rd rail network. They were designed for 90mph running, but of course you can't do that for a lot of the highland lines and you're lucky to get about 25mph over Rannoch Moor I think? Anyway, as far as traction is concerned, it's a case of old cast-offs rather than investment in new and better.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  21. chdot
    Admin

    "

    They were intended as mixed-traffic locomotives, hauling parcels, freight and also passenger trains, usually on routes that included some non-electrified sections, such as boat trains.

    "

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_73

    I.e. the diesel power was for low speed hauling in 'the final mile' to Dover and Folkestone ports.

    Not (I would have thought) ideal for long distances.

    I assume they are very cheap. I also assume that there will be some element of 'keeping them running' relying on skills and expertise of people where they are currently looked after.

    Update

    Perhaps the skills aren't too specialist, but the remaining locos don't seem to be getting much intensive use -

    http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=British_Rail_Class_73#Post-privatisation_operations

    Posted 10 years ago #

  22. chdot
    Admin

    A railway insider writes -

    "
    My understanding is that the locos are being completely rebuilt with new
    engines and control systems - giving 1,600 horse power, so may be required
    to operate in pairs when hauling the sleeper over Druimuachdar.

    "

    Posted 10 years ago #

  23. Tulyar
    Member

    Class 73 has been rebuilt by RVEL in Derby with 2 x Cummins 750Hp diesel generator units to provide the diesel equivalent of electric power and replace low speed English Electric 600Hp unit - roughly identical to the units used in Class 210 DEMU on NIR, the SR Thumpers and Hastings sets, and the ubiquitous 08 shunter, based on a design first introduced by LMS in 1936(?).

    It may be that they can operate in push-pull mode as the Class 27's did on the Edinburgh-Glasgow route, saving the run-round.

    Class 67 are pretty heavy on the track - as the tests with Tornado showed - the Class 67 being dragged made prominent spikes in the track load weighing trace compared to the steam engine pulling the train.

    Interesting about Class 92, as the sleeper timing speed is up to 90mph to Carstairs, but 80mph thereafter IIRC

    Posted 10 years ago #

  24. steveo
    Member

    Does it matter how fast the sleeper can go? Doesn't it spend a couple of hours sitting around in some places?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  25. ARobComp
    Member

    In general the sleeper gets into London some time between 5am and 5:45am from my recollection. I usually get my breakfast wake up at 6:45. They set off at 11:30pm so basically at it takes 5.5 hours I guess

    Posted 10 years ago #

  26. kaputnik
    Moderator

    Does it matter how fast the sleeper can go?

    It would if it's trying to make up time when it is inevitably held up during overnight engineering works.

    Class 67 are pretty heavy on the track

    Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't that the logic of keeping 6-axle class 37s on the service north for so many years? Mightn't it make more sense to go back to using the latter seeing as they worked it ably for many years rather than try something new and untested?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  27. steveo
    Member

    It would if it's trying to make up time when it is inevitably held up during overnight engineering works.

    Yeah fair point.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  28. kaputnik
    Moderator

    @Steveo you're probably right though that it matters not if it's a bit slower, I'm sure it wouldn't matter to many people if the train gets in at 5AM and they get up at 6:45AM or if it gets in at 6AM or 6:30AM and they get up at the same time.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  29. cb
    Member

    http://www.scotsman.com/news/transport/train-driver-doubts-over-caledonian-sleeper-plans-1-3536204

    "FEARS have been raised by train drivers that plans to transform the Caledonian Sleeper into a “world class experience” will be threatened by using re-built 50-year-old locomotives which have a “terrible” past record"

    Posted 10 years ago #

  30. kaputnik
    Moderator

    I've been rooting around for more details, and finally turned up something that might actually be relevant to cycling (and not just train anoraks).

    From what I read, currently the "up" Fort William portion of the Highland Sleeper (i.e. the bit heading for London) gets to Edinburgh to be joined with the Inverness and Aberdeen portions. Each part is 6 cars long; 4 sleeper cars, a lounge/guards van and a seated passenger van. However there is a 16 carriage limit for the consist heading south from Edinburgh. This means that 2 cars are detached from the Fort William portion so the lounge, seated passengers and outsize luggage (i.e. bikes) have to be transferred to the Aberdeen portion of the train.

    Apparently the new arrangements only have 3 sleeper cars therefore a 15 car train in total and mean that this manoeuvre will no longer be necessary and bikes can stay in place all the way from Fort William to London.

    Also, the inconvenient stop in Glasgow at Westerton on the western outskirts is to be replaced by one at Queen Street Low Level. Useful, as the morning down train (to Fort William) is actually a timetabled service for early morning Hillwalkers and those heading to Mallaig for early ferries and the up train is the only train out of Fort William late at night to Glasgow and Edinburgh that can meet trains serving the small isles ferries and evening sailing from Armadale.

    I have also read that due to rebuilding of Euston (and also if HS2 goes there) that the Sleeper may have to relocate, probably to Waterloo.

    Posted 10 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

123

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin